One to one benefit assessments

[Amazonjaunt]

It would save money in the long run if all benefits claims had to be assessed one to one, surely?

So you think that the HCP who had no idea what DD's condition was and who, as I said in a previous post, had clearly not read the supporting evidence in any detail would provide an extra layer of evidence showing that DD deserved to get PIP.

I really don't know what to say if you think that is actually a reasonable statement to make.

Then you're a hopeless case. You've evidently barely read anything on here in response to WHY that is not feasible. I suggest you cure your boredom in a different way. You are absolutely not here for a discussion, you come across as an automaton; and definitely not equipped for an intelligent argument on this subject.

OP is like a robot or a stuck record 🙄 no point in sensible discussion.

That isn't always how it works in paediatrics though. My son is under so many specialists that communication is often difficult and they are hard to get hold of between appointments, the fact that he's under so many also causes confusion between them at times.

DWP doesn't always call when it comes to DLA either.

Yep, absolutely. If the evidence covers all the domains and is up to date then no extra assessment would be needed.

The other issue, as people have pointed out, is that assessors aren't matched well with claimants, whether that's a paper, phone or in person assessment, which can lead to it being unreliable, and just giving points for keywords rather than fully understanding the claimants experience. Ideally they should be - physios for mobility issues, mental health nurses for mental health conditions etc, paediatric specialists for DLA etc, but that doesn't seem to be the reality, according to a colleague who spent a brief period working with DWP as an assessor.

No, but I think they call much more often than for PIP. I see patients up to 20 years old, and never had a call regarding PIP, but lots for DLA. Appreciate different for everyone though.

Only 1.4% of National Income (GDP) is spent on PIP and it's predecessor DLA combined (I believe some people are still on the legacy award). This is a tiny amount of national spending and it really makes no sense to focus so heavily on it as a source of cuts. And denying disabled people the money they need to live on just causes increased pressure on the health, social and care services. It's false economies. I don't know why people are so obsessed.

My DSD was born at 25 weeks. She had two brain haemorrhages and can’t see or breathe properly because of the oxygen and ventilator she was on for many months when she was born.

She is severely impaired, is semi-independent and unable to work. It took years of encouraging her to focus on what she can do for her to reach this stage. The PIP application process has been horrendous for her. We have had to focus on what she can’t do, undoing the years of positive encouragement. She had a face to face assessment last week and we are waiting for the decision. If she is denied we have to go through MR and appeal, once again focusing on her inabilities rather than her abilities.

She will never get better. But it is not enough to say she has learning disabilities because of her recorded medical conditions. We have to say how this affects her life. How she can’t cook safely or be alone in the kitchen, how she has severe problems washing herself, how difficult it is for her to travel (obviously she will never drive) because she can’t see the departure boards.

Humiliating personal information she has had to disclose to me and a complete stranger at her assessment for her to get the financial support she needs and deserves.

This is why I am infuriated by people like the OP who think they know better that PIP claimants are lying just to get benefits. Even if she does get an award, it won’t amount to minimum wage and in the long term it costs taxpayers a lot more money. It would save so much money if they could look at her medical records and say, yep, extreme prematurity causing brain damage and severe eyesight problems - big tick , no need to see her, give her the benefits. And yet she will still have to go back in 3-10 years to say, still brain damaged.

And what the OP wants is for every single applicant to see someone in person to prove their disability isn’t made up.

Tell me you know nothing about claiming PIP without saying you know nothing about claiming PIP.

And don’t you DARE say, “well obviously, I didn’t mean people like your DSD”.

Yes, you do.

Because people like you who assume PIP claimants are lying more often than they are not, people like you who say they should all have face to face appointments, people like you are not happy unless only people obviously disabled get PIP. And despite her brain damage, you cannot tell by looking that she is disabled.

You disgust me.

Here's what AI says about this issue:

Are Claimants who fill in paper applications twice as likely to be granted support as those seen in person?

No, there is no evidence supporting the specific claim that benefit claimants who fill in paper applications are twice as likely to be granted support as those seen in person. 1, 2]
This statement stems from community misunderstandings on platforms like Mumsnet and social media, which confuse application formats with assessment types. 1, 2]

The Core Misconception
The rumor confuses the general application process with a specific Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) process known as a Paper-Based Review (PBR). 1, 2, 3, 4]
Paper-Based Review (PBR): An assessment style where a decision-maker awards Personal Independence Payment (PIP) or Work Capability Assessments (WCA) solely using written medical evidence and the questionnaire, bypassing any need for a face-to-face, phone, or video interview. 1, 2]
The Reality of PBRs: PBRs are generally reserved for claimants who have already submitted overwhelming, clear-cut medical evidence from GPs or specialists, or where a face-to-face assessment would pose a substantial risk of harm. They are not an option you can simply select to double your chances of success. 1, 2, 3, 4]

Face-to-Face vs. Paper Success Rates
While the DWP does not publish data showing paper applications are twice as successful, historical data from appeals tribunals shows the exact opposite trend for disputing claims: 1]
In-Person Appeal Success: Claimants who attend their appeals tribunals in person historically have a success rate of around 90%.
Paper-Only Appeal Success: Claimants who choose to have their appeals decided strictly on paper evidence see their success rates drop significantly, sometimes to around 50% or less. 1]
Ultimately, the format of the initial application form (online vs. physical paper) has no statistical bearing on an award outcome. Decisions are heavily weighted on the depth of the professional supporting evidence provided. 1, 2, 3]

In terms of fraud I’d be more inclined to suggest a regular audit of social housing use. We are so desperate for this resource and it could free up additional properties.

You talk about lying claimants but not the lying assessors. Why? I'm more concerned about this but it seems no politician wants to tackle this

Agree with this one. My neighbours live in social housing, yet earn over 100k a year (that’s the price of a house here!) they complained the council won’t sell them the house…. Yet could easily afford a mortgage on a non social housing property. Joke.

This was the thinking behind the introduction of PIP and the ongoing assessment of every claimant every few years - this idea that some people will get better, that they shouldn't be left on benefits but rather encouraged into work.

But the reality is that most people with disabilities don't get better and if you manage to qualify in the first place, you are at a high level of need to start with. And the constant worry of the next assessment and the possible removal of the benefit is so stressful for many people.

I just got a letter to say that my dult daughter's award is being extended to 2031 - she has epilepsy and she has a quarterly review with the hospital, plus she has a diagnosis of moderate learning disability ie low IQ which is never going to change. The DWP staff know it's futile to keep reassessing her - it's a load of unnecessary work for me and for them.

Just wanted to pop in here and note that a vast number of PIP claimants over 25 will have already or will be receiving extension letters ranging from a few months to approx 4 years in some cases, due to the extraordinary legislation brought in in June. This is because the review system cannot cope (something i as a WB specialist have witnessed for a long time and knew something had to give). This is the only way the DWP can get breathing space to try and catch up. System has been a broken mess for a long while.

Again, one of the first questions is whether they can have access to your nhs records.

if they have full access to your nhs records the evidence you provide is largely irrelevant because they can see everything.

My DS1 was born at 24 weeks and has multiple complex disabilities. We got his EHCP on our first attempt. He received DLA the first time we applied. When he turned 16 he was awarded maximum PIP without an interview.

The only time we’ve been interviewed is the only time that the wrong decision was made. This was for LCWRA. The assessor was on the phone rather than in person, but still, it wasn’t a paper based decision. He introduced himself as “a doctor”. A doctor in what, I have no idea. He didn’t even give his name so I couldn’t attempt to find out who he was. He insisted on speaking to my son at length even though I am his legal appointee. He made him extremely distressed. He completely ignored my son’s autism, which is severe and is what affects him the most. He didn’t know the difference between learning difficulty and learning disability. He gave my son a frankly insulting “test”, asking him incredibly basic questions, presumably to prove to himself that he doesn’t have a learning disability (he doesn’t - he has a learning difficulty). On and on it went. It was a horrible experience.

I complained about him immediately following the assessment, but even then, the wrong decision was made and we had months of going through the mandatory reconsideration process….. which was paper based.

Yes, for first application for PIP, my younger daughter (asd) was assessed by a physiotherapist who simply didn't understand her condition or young people. He asked her if she chatted to her friends on the phone - he meant long telephone conversations to best buddies, she said yes but she meant sending one or two text messages to people she knew from school, as she had no friends, had terrible literacy skills, had a phobia of speaking to people.

She was turned down for PIP but this was overturned at Mandatory Reconsideration - I can only assume they realised how spectacularly wrong the assessment had been. I had submitted 23 reports as evidence but these seemed to count for nothing compared to this awful assessment.

@Bushmillsbabe so you've just pointed out the enormous weakness in OP's idea: if everyone should have a face to face assessment, and this assessment should be carried out by people who are expert in the claimant's condition or conditions, this is going to cost a FORTUNE. Not to mention that clinicians like that will already be working in the health service.

I came across a post on X this week by someone's brother. He has spina bifida and has to be reassessed every 4 years. What a waste of resources

To me that's not actually a waste of resources. I work in paediatrics with a number of children with spina bifida. The condition itself is obviously permanent, but the impact of the condition (,which is what DLA/PIP looks at) changes over time, often increasing as a child grows, and as complications develop etc. So the award may start off at a lower level, and increase over time. But it could be done differently and definitely as a paper exercise - they get a form where can tick box 'my needs haven't changed and I don't need a review' or 'my needs have changed and I would like my award reviewed'

Yeah what does that mean? The form filling and the interview are completely separate events.

I wonder if OP has ever tried to claim benefits as she knows almost nothing about the subject.

@LilyBunch25 , I'm so sorry to read that you lost clients in such a tragic way. That must be really tough, and I hope you got plenty of support.

This is very true about medication and it is possible to deduce a fair bit about someone's health from the medication they're prescribed.

For example, I know that someone who has a monthly depot injection of zuclopenthixol not only has a significant mental health problem but that they are also unlikely to be able to manage their medication themselves. If they were, they'd be on tablets, not a depot injection.

Thankyou; It was, and I was very lucky to have good support at the time. It was devastating for the families.